Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
STRAWBERRY GROWERS' SELLING CO., Inc., v. AMERICAN RY. EXPRESS CO., 1929 — 31 F.2d 947 · caselaw · US
General
STRAWBERRY GROWERS' SELLING CO., Inc., v. AMERICAN RY. EXPRESS CO.
31 F.2d 947·United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·1929
Before BRYAN and FOSTER, Circuit Judges, and GRUBB, District Judge.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
STRAWBERRY GROWERS’ SELLING CO., Inc., v. AMERICAN RY. EXPRESS CO.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Court.
April 5, 1929.
No. 5114.
Chas. T. Madison, of New Orleans, La., and W. S. Rownd, of Hammond, La., for plaintiff in error.
Selim B. Lemle, of New Orleans, La. (A. M. Hartung, of New York City, and Hunter C. Leake and Lemle, Moreno & Lemle, all of New Orleans, La., on tbe brief), for defendant in error.
Before BRYAN and FOSTER, Circuit Judges, and GRUBB, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
This was a suit to collect an undercharge in express rates upon interstate shipments of strawberries. It was brought more than two years, but less than three years, after the shipments were made.
The defenses were: (1) Prescription of two years under the Louisiana statute; and (2) estoppel, in that appellant had settled with the farmers whom it represented upon-the basis of the rates charged and collected as the shipments were made.
As these were interstate shipments, the state statute of prescription does not apply. Suit within three years from the time the cause of action accrued is authorized by act of Congress. USCA tit. 49, § 16, par. 3(a).
The carrier was bound to collect the legal rate, and a shipper who has paid less cannot invoke the principle of estoppel. Pittsburgh, etc., R. Co. v. Pink, 250 U. S.. 577, 40 S. Ct. 27, 63 L. Ed. 1151.
The judgment is affirmed.